On 8/1/19 3:50 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
We started rejecting this test with r268321, whereby we process the compound_literal in finish_compound_literal normally even in a template if it's not instantiation-dependent. This broke with __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in a template function, because instantiation_dependent_expression_p didn't consider it dependent, which resulted in a bogus error later.cp_make_fname_decl has TYPE_DEP indicating that the fname is dependent, so I think value_dependent_expression_p needs to be fixed as below, and actually treat such a fname as dependent. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk and 9? 2019-08-01 Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> PR c++/91230 - wrong error with __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ and generic lambda. * pt.c (value_dependent_expression_p): Consider __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ inside a template function value-dependent. * g++.dg/cpp1y/lambda-generic-pretty1.C: New test. diff --git gcc/cp/pt.c gcc/cp/pt.c index 91a46745447..94706bc5ad1 100644 --- gcc/cp/pt.c +++ gcc/cp/pt.c @@ -25553,7 +25553,11 @@ value_dependent_expression_p (tree expression) if (DECL_HAS_VALUE_EXPR_P (expression)) { tree value_expr = DECL_VALUE_EXPR (expression); - if (value_dependent_expression_p (value_expr)) + if (value_dependent_expression_p (value_expr) + /* __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ inside a template function is dependent + on the name of the function. */ + || (DECL_PRETTY_FUNCTION_P (expression) + && value_expr == error_mark_node))
Hmm, when would value_expr not be error_mark_node for __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in a template?
Jason
